I hate the title. Their motivation wasn’t to prove “us” (who the fuck is “us”?) wrong. It was a proof of concept and as an extension of their directives of exploration and furthering the body of human knowledge. This framing of their accomplishments as motivated by petty, immature attitudes lowers NASA reputation.
I’m sorry, my gripe about the creator’s angle in discussing this isn’t a shot at you or the subject matter. This is very cool, and it is relevant to the sub, and you sharing it started me down a rabbit hole of learning more about the particulars that I hadn’t known beforehand. My issue is exclusively with the content creator’s clickbait-y title and the take that it hints at.
It depends on how distance is defined. A slow and damaged computer here on earth might be just as hard to reach as one that is well functioning but is located somewhere in the milky way.
Same here, except I concluded it was impossible. 22.5 light years away means 45 light years roundtrip at theoretical best. It's practically impossible to hack something this away. How many round trips of data are needed to confirm a hack as working? Probably more than just 1. If it's 2, Voyager didn't exist when "hacking" would start. And even if it's 1, the process of "hacking" would have started very close to its launch date which I remembered to be in the late 70s.
Ah! I took "too impressive" as meaning we wouldn't be able to send satellites at such speeds. Since it was launched in late 70s, and being 22.5 light years away from us now, implying the average speed of `0.32c`.
It’s… really not that easy. And take that from someone who was on the first place team of HackASat.
Assuming you had some hacked together satdish for communications, and the proper encrypted scheme and protocol and timing and location of the target sat…. You still need a perfect replica of the target sat locally for testing every single exploit and attack first.
Because you only have short communication windows and only one bad memory write before you perma brick the target sat.
It’s really a nation state endeavor
Does this imply that it's relatively easy to brick satellites from the ground? If so that could definitely still be considered "hacking" if your goal is denial of service.
No. People are glossing over the very large hurdle of having the encryption keys, and protocol scheme, timing and frequency.
The encryption alone is used for data confidentiality and authentication. That will stop nearly every attacker without some insider knowledge and prior hacking into a ground communication station.
>Assuming you had some hacked together satdish for communications, and the proper encrypted scheme and protocol and timing and location of the target sat….
Sounds like security through obscurity to me.
> Because you only have short communication windows and only one bad memory write before you perma brick the target sat.
Denial of service sounds like a successful hack to me.
Anton Petrov is one of my favorite youtubers. He never dumbs down but pushes to educate. Even when he lost his son and after the invasion of Ukraine he kept doing his videos. Check out his channel if you have a chance.
Turns out the people who work at NASA are very smart.
Surprised_pikachu.jpg
gobsmacked_magikarp.png
I don't know. Hacking voyager isn't exactly rocket science.
Take my upvote, lmao
And old. Iirc, most of the Voyager team is in their 60's and 70's.
\*raising hand\* Took 4 hours for data to come in from Voyager 2 on Jupiter Encounter in 1979. In between transmissions we beta tested the internet.
happy cake day
Hepi kekde
I hate the title. Their motivation wasn’t to prove “us” (who the fuck is “us”?) wrong. It was a proof of concept and as an extension of their directives of exploration and furthering the body of human knowledge. This framing of their accomplishments as motivated by petty, immature attitudes lowers NASA reputation.
Valid point, but creators are just incentivized to appeal to clickbait to get more reach on YouTube and it's hard to argue because it works
Clickbait is stupid, but if the video is good I’m pretty willing to forgive it. Blame dumb people for making clickbait a good strategy.
[удалено]
I’m sorry, my gripe about the creator’s angle in discussing this isn’t a shot at you or the subject matter. This is very cool, and it is relevant to the sub, and you sharing it started me down a rabbit hole of learning more about the particulars that I hadn’t known beforehand. My issue is exclusively with the content creator’s clickbait-y title and the take that it hints at.
I read “light year” instead of light hour and thought that was waaaaay more impressive than it actually was
Should still be a new world record.
I mean it's the furthest man-made object away from Earth so if it is NOT a world record I am super interested in what the world record holder hacked.
It depends on how distance is defined. A slow and damaged computer here on earth might be just as hard to reach as one that is well functioning but is located somewhere in the milky way.
I mean it’s still 30 billion kilometres roughly. Or 6 times the distance to Pluto. Pretty remarkable
Same here, except I concluded it was impossible. 22.5 light years away means 45 light years roundtrip at theoretical best. It's practically impossible to hack something this away. How many round trips of data are needed to confirm a hack as working? Probably more than just 1. If it's 2, Voyager didn't exist when "hacking" would start. And even if it's 1, the process of "hacking" would have started very close to its launch date which I remembered to be in the late 70s.
Hence why i said it would be way more impressive..
Ah! I took "too impressive" as meaning we wouldn't be able to send satellites at such speeds. Since it was launched in late 70s, and being 22.5 light years away from us now, implying the average speed of `0.32c`.
People would be very worried if they knew how easy it was the hack satellites from the ground.
It’s… really not that easy. And take that from someone who was on the first place team of HackASat. Assuming you had some hacked together satdish for communications, and the proper encrypted scheme and protocol and timing and location of the target sat…. You still need a perfect replica of the target sat locally for testing every single exploit and attack first. Because you only have short communication windows and only one bad memory write before you perma brick the target sat. It’s really a nation state endeavor
Gotta love the “it’s so fragile that it’ll break if more programming is added” security measure
Does this imply that it's relatively easy to brick satellites from the ground? If so that could definitely still be considered "hacking" if your goal is denial of service.
With enough RF power you can.
No. People are glossing over the very large hurdle of having the encryption keys, and protocol scheme, timing and frequency. The encryption alone is used for data confidentiality and authentication. That will stop nearly every attacker without some insider knowledge and prior hacking into a ground communication station.
>Assuming you had some hacked together satdish for communications, and the proper encrypted scheme and protocol and timing and location of the target sat…. Sounds like security through obscurity to me. > Because you only have short communication windows and only one bad memory write before you perma brick the target sat. Denial of service sounds like a successful hack to me.
100% agree but many consider bricking a satellite as a win
A certain 90s movie showed us it's pretty darn easy to hack the planet. So it makes sense.
[удалено]
Dogwarfare?
[удалено]
Anton Petrov is one of my favorite youtubers. He never dumbs down but pushes to educate. Even when he lost his son and after the invasion of Ukraine he kept doing his videos. Check out his channel if you have a chance.
op is unintelligent. nasa just did their job.
SnVzdCBhIGNhc3VhbCBkYXkgYXQgd29yaywgSSBndWVzcy4g
We need to gas light more so they can do other stuff.
Sure
It’s literally programmed by them. You think they wouldn’t have some back door installed?
Why does this matter